Title Anykščių šilelis Stanislovo Dagilio akimis /
Translation of Title The forest of Anykščiai in Stanislovas Dagilis’ eyes.
Authors Lazdynas, Gintaras
Full Text Download
Is Part of Acta humanitarica universitatis Saulensis.. Šiauliai : Šiaulių universiteto leidykla. 2011, t. 12, p. 141-151.. ISSN 1822-7309
Keywords [eng] The forest of Anykščiai ; poetry ; prose ; sense ; mind ; imagination ; mimesis ; ideal
Abstract [eng] Stanislovas Dagilis was among the first literary theorists in Lithuania. In his article he emphasised the difference between poetry and prose on the ground of the poem “The Forest of Anykščiai” (Lith. “Anykščių šilelis”) by Antanas Baranauskas. This was the first exhaustive interpretation of the poem. Dagilis does not refer to the classicistic mimesis principle (observe, cognise, imitate nature) but rather singles out the category of the ideal and states that a poet must overcome nature by the means of imagination, i.e. to subjugate its depiction to the principle of the ideal. With his statements, Dagilis joins the common European context of the theoretical thought which originated by the efforts of representatives of German Classicism (Baumgarten and Winckelmann), was continued by Wilhelm von Humboldt and Benedetto Croce. Humboldt viewed prose and poetry as two tendencies of spiritual development. Poetry is the primary one, based on sense; whereas prose appears on the ground of poetry and is based on mind. That is why poetry creates a new world and prose presents the world as it is (Meyer); poetry is the language of senses, prose is the language of mind (Croce). Dagilis follows these rules as well. “The Forest of Anykščiai” reflects not the forest that really grew near Anykščiai but it is a picture created after a certain idea out of real thoroughly selected and rearranged material: lacking parts were additionally created and unnecessary ones were rejected. If a poet does not violate the laws of art, then one creates such a view out of own ideal images and the content of reality where ideal beauty becomes real and accessible to senses. Baranauskas depicted the forest not as it was but as it should be, as it could be; the forest that could be perceived by reader’s senses as if it such existed in reality. Without such aim, Dagilis makes no attempts to deeper analyse the poem. [...].
Published Šiauliai : Šiaulių universiteto leidykla
Type Journal article
Language Lithuanian
Publication date 2011